Skip to main content

Bioethics in Social Context

  • Chapter
Philosophy of Medicine and Bioethics

Part of the book series: Philosophy and Medicine ((PHME,volume 50))

Summary

In summary, I have argued that this difficulty in attending and recognizing is tied to restrictive methodological assumptions about the field of bioethics. These restrictive assumptions are not just unfortunate blindspots, but potentially disabling forces to those who are most vulnerable and powerless in medical interactions. I have also argued that placing bioethical inquiry in the larger context of other humanities and social science disciplines will help to counter this methodological parochialism. The distinct advantage of placing bioethics in social context is that an interdisciplinary setting makes it less likely that we will be seduced by the intellectual glamour, or the intuitive emotional appeal, of any single approach to moral problems. Resisting a hyper-theoretical approach to the methods of bioethics will make for greater agility in problem-solving, and more resilience in facing those problems that cannot be solved. It will, in the end, make for better health professionals and for better patient care.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 129.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Anonymous: 1992a, ‘Bedside story’, Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics 2, 185–186.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Anonymous: 1992b, ‘Bedside story’, Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics 3, 285–286.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Arras, J. and Hunt, R. (eds.): 1983 (2nd ed.), Ethical Issues in Modern Medicine, Mayfield, Palo Alto, CA.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Arras, J. and Steinbock, B. (eds.): 1995 (4th ed.), Ethical Issues in Modern Medicine, Mayfield, Palo Alto, CA.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Beauchamp, T. and Childress, J.: 1979 (1st ed.), 1995 (4th ed.), Principles of Biomedical Ethics, Oxford University Press, New York, NY.

    Google Scholar 

  6. Berger, J. and Mohr, J.: 1976, A Fortunate Man, Writers and Readers Publishing Cooperative, London, U. K.

    Google Scholar 

  7. Carson, R.: 1995, ‘Beyond respect to recognition and due regard’, in Chronic Illness: From Experience to Policy, S. K. Toombs, D. Barnard and R. Carson (eds.), Indiana University Press, Bloomington, IN.

    Google Scholar 

  8. Charon, R.: 1994, ‘Narrative contributions to medical ethics: Recognition, formulation, interpretation, and validation in the practice of the ethicist’, in A Matter of Principles? Ferment in U. S. Bioethics, E. DuBose, R. Hamel and L. O’Connell (eds.), Trinity Press International, Valley Forge, PA.

    Google Scholar 

  9. Churchill, L.: 1980, ‘Bioethical reductionism and our sense of the human’, Man and Medicine 5, 229–242.

    Google Scholar 

  10. Crites, S.: 1971, ‘The narrative quality of experience’, Journal of the American Academy of Religion XXXIX, 291–311.

    Google Scholar 

  11. Frank, A.: 1991, At the Will of the Body, Houghton Mifflin, Boston, MA.

    Google Scholar 

  12. Hauerwas, S.: 1977, Truthfulness and Tragedy, University of Notre Dame Press, Notre Dame, IN.

    Google Scholar 

  13. Jonsen, A. and Toulmin, S.: 1988, The Abuse of Casuistry, University of California Press, Berkeley, CA.

    Google Scholar 

  14. MacIntyre, A.: 1981, After Virtue, University of Notre Dame Press, Notre Dame, IN.

    Google Scholar 

  15. Merleau-Ponty, M.: 1964, Signs, R. McLeary (trans.), Northwestern University Press, Evanston, IL.

    Google Scholar 

  16. Miller, J.: 1987, The Ethics of Reading: Kant, deMan, Eliot, Trollope, James and Benjamin, Columbia University Press, New York, NY.

    Google Scholar 

  17. Murray, T.: 1993, ‘Moral reasoning in social context’, Journal of Social Issues 49, 185–200.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Toulmin, S.: 1994, ‘Casuistry and clinical ethics’, in A Matter of Principles, E. DuBose, R. Hamel and L. O’Connell (eds.), Trinity Press International, Valley Forge, PA.

    Google Scholar 

  19. Wittgenstein, L.: 1967, Zettel, G. Anscombe (trans.), Basil Blackwell, Oxford, U.K.

    Google Scholar 

  20. Wolf, S.: 1992, ‘Toward a theory of process’, Law, Medicine and Health Care 20, 278–289.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 1997 Kluwer Academic Publishers

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Churchill, L.R. (1997). Bioethics in Social Context. In: Carson, R.A., Burns, C.R. (eds) Philosophy of Medicine and Bioethics. Philosophy and Medicine, vol 50. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/0-306-48133-2_9

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/0-306-48133-2_9

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht

  • Print ISBN: 978-0-7923-3545-0

  • Online ISBN: 978-0-306-48133-8

  • eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive

Publish with us

Policies and ethics